Some more on antifrallity
here’s a bit of a definition from Wikipedia:
Antifragility is a property of systems that increase in capability, resilience, or robustness as a result of stressors, shocks, volatility, noise, mistakes, faults, attacks, or failures. It is a concept developed by Professor Nassim Nicholas Taleb in his book, Antifragile.
thing is i believe the ‘word’ defies definition. lol, after all, it’s not quite yet really a word, i don’t believe. and it may never be, may never should be. just me maybe, but i’d be willing to bet (if I weren’t so cheap and risk avers and gain crazy) that Taleb would deny the above definition. my guess is that definition is close but no cigar, sorta thing. and it should, imho be so. to me, it’s a philosophical bug one might wanna get in ones ear, sorta thing. far different than math stuff, more like philosophical stuff, more primal, like stuff that went on in our ancestors being that shaped and formed what we are at the core and separates us from other creatures, sorta thing. so moving on from there, is math stuff and concepts of advantage and the like important? well, hell yeah, so but this antifragillity thang is got almost a musical quality to it, difficult to define, but it’s for real there. perhaps, i’m wrong but I believe it has some utility. utility in the sense like what comes up out of ‘ah ha’ sorta experiences, that most likely we’ve all experienced. that sorta thing, where we are blind to something , perhaps for years and years, and then all a sudden, bingo, wowser, it pops up and there we have it, some new knowledge or trick up our sleeve that has real utility and value. so is there some math and equations hooked up with this new not a word antifragillity philosophical thang? i believe there is because Taleb messes with plenty of complex equations and maths. beyond me, i’ll just say, and frankly i for one wouldn’t much wanna go there.since there’s plenty of math stuff already hooked up with advantage play and the like. point being from Taleb’s writing, is be careful, lol. so is anything really, really antifragile? me thinks not. except perhaps for the universe or perhaps the universe plus God. but don’t worry, i won’t go there. heck guys and gals, kelly betting isn’t even antifragille, philosophically speaking, nor is the concept of advantage. lest we forget, that for example an electron can truly overcome an energy barrier that it doesn’t have enough energy to overcome, sorta thing, well, lets not fool ourselves, even the best of the best kelly bettors could blow up, and go bankrupt. there is after all still some percentage of risk of ruin there. so far as antifragillity, my take on it is things can be antifragille, up to a point.
sorry about all that rambling, bumbling blab
all that so I can yak a bit about my graphs, I posted above, lol.
so here we go. i was bowled over by the fact that it was possible to produce a what if graph from the data of genuine advantage play that yielded a concave linearity, hence, indicator of fragility. but a bit of thought over the matter and sincerity over getting at the truth of the matter, and i believe a ‘crack in the cosmic egg’ occurred for me, i believe.. by the way, the book The Crack In The Cosmic Egg by Joseph Chilton Pearce is a great read (that said firewalking isn’t that much of a physical mystery, but the courage to do so, is ), imho. more rambling, I know, sorry. so but anyway, check the three graphs below.
so anyway, baffled, flustered, i tinkered some more, took the ‘nightmare scenario’, convex (antifragile) what if graph of cumulative win/loss data sorted so that largest loss, next largest loss,…, on up to smallest win, on up to finally the largest win was ordered as if it happened that way in real time and the ‘dreamy’, concave (fragile) what if graph of cumulative win/loss data sorted so that the largest win, next largest win,…, on downward to the smallest loss, next larger loss on downward to the largest loss was ordered as if it happened that way in real time as well, took those two graphs, merged them and made one graph, then took the cumulative win/loss data real time graph and merged it as well.
so what we have, is some insight into what didn’t happen but what could have happened, compared to what did happen, sorta thing. so what?, one might ask. well heck, i dunno. just me maybe, but it shows the spectrum of antifragility and fragility that is existent, behind the scene, the veil of what did happen, sorta thing. in other words, there are potentials beyond what we think we know as we experience our play and how we expect our play to unfold.
If you look at the final graph, it’s apparent that a huge multitude of non graphed lines could be transposed into that graph, within the bounds of the fragile and antifragile extremes. to where it’s obvious many, many kinds of potentials exist far as how things might unfold. it’s always a rosy ending far as this graph depicts, however, the fact that there is the extreme fragile element existent, it seems it would be wise that one remain critically cautious with respect to future events and consider measures to protect against sailing along oblivious to any hidden threats while all has gone so grandly in the past, sorta thing. that said, it would appear that continuously playing with the same advantage and conditions of state, given enough time (and bankroll, at least a big enough bankroll to live through that biggest dip on the graph) that one might sail around and around the outer extremes of the graph or within those extremes living life for the most part in the money. so it is, pretty much I guess how it is living within the walls of the casino, while playing with an advantage, all that said long as cracks in the casino wall don’t happen to where the world outside comes filtering in.
so anyway, just me maybe but it’s interesting how the real time events unfolded as a relatively near average of the two extreme whatif outcomes, sorta thing. one might ask, how is it i didn’t have to live in the ‘dreamy’ but fragile order of events or the ‘nightmarish’ but antifragile order of events and instead experienced the order of events such as they happened? my guess is that the ‘realm’ inside the two extremes is a probability space for which the average is pretty close to the in real time events unfolded. so in a sense the advantage drives the outcomes of each event with respect to other possible outcomes.
Apologies for any grammatical, speiling or conceptual errors, but my one eyed cat helped me type this out while he was trying to hustle a piece of my apple pie.
edit:, by the way my trip was nice, not much income, a bit, but heck a enjoyable time spent.
edit:, note: final graph looks like crack in the cosmic egg, sorta thing, lol